we now have 100% dna proof... is it not a well deserved ending for child related offences and murders, and other henious crimes..
2006-09-05 04:49:24 · 40 answers · asked by paulrb8 7 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Yes I think so, but i also think that paedophiles etc should be used instead of animals in experiments, instead of just being killed or put in prison, at least then they would be made to suffer like they make other people suffer, and it would save many animals too.
2006-09-05 04:54:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No! For a start with all the court appeals a prisoner will make if they are condemned to die costs far more than life imprisonment. Who pays? The tax payer.
Also miscarriages of justice occur all the time. Most condemned people in the States are poor, black males. Who can 't afford a decent defence.
Morally its wrong. Hanging if done wrong can be a very painful death. Its against the European human rights laws so its unlikely to change in the UK.
Also we have to consider mental illness. Is it right to kill someone who was mentally ill at the time of the crime? Its been done in the states and the last man we hung in the UK had the mind of a child. And was innocent too.
No its not the way forward its the way back to burning at the stake and hang drawing and quartering.Its okay for Iran and places like that but Darling its simply not cricket is it? Let them rot in an over crowded Victorian Hell hole of a prison far more British don t you think?
The only western country to practise it is the States. Its expensive, doesn't change the rate of crime but is a real vote winner.
2006-09-05 05:10:23 · answer #2 · answered by Nicola H 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've always been an advocate of capital and corporal punishment. The only slight difference I'd make would be to give the condemned a choice in the method of death e.g. hanging, shooting or whatever, so long as it's within reason. People who talk of our civilised societies are insane. Possibly in another 10,000 years or so we might be approaching that state but at present we're very little above the animals we came from. Let's not kid ourselves. Again there are those who witter on about punishment not reducing or stopping crime. True it will never stop it 100% but it will reduce incidents of crime dramatically, and that is precisely what the average person wants. Bring back Mr. Guillotine!!
heavenlyhaggis
2006-09-05 05:28:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Returning to hanging is absolutely out of the question. It would be yet a massive step back towards the dark ages for a country whose culture is on a constant decline into violent & disrespectful behaviour. Anyone who is without question guilty of a dispicable crime such as pre-meditated murder, rape or child molestation should be locked up in a small dingy room and have the key thrown away. A life time of imprisonment is much worse a punichment than the death penalty and also a much bigger deterrant.
As for other crimes our criminal justice system should be enforcing a policy of forced and disciplined education, once the audience is captive the criminal element who are often those that decided education was for pansies should be brought in line whilst locked up and taught how to fend for themselves in society without turning to crime.
Hanging is not an option for a modern day civilised society though.
2006-09-05 19:57:00 · answer #4 · answered by Crash 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, and i will justify that, with the number of people, who have been released, when police corruption, has come to the surface. Im not talking about new evidence, im talking about all this hush hush secret service, lets make someone pay kinda bul thats going on.
100% dna proof..... 100% proof....... Its only any good, if you belive, that all police are 100% accurate, and trustworthy.
Are they, well lets think about the number of times policemen get away with stuff, where i used to live, a police car, was caught in a speeding trap, and after months of woe, guess what, they couldnt figure out who had been driving the car.. This kinda nonsense happens all the time..
You cant trust the police, so you cant be 100% sure.
Having said this.. sure bring hanging back, i h8 paying tax, so what if afew good people die. It will serve as a deterrant to the rest. I think human life is overvalued anyway..
Best please, for giving you reasons for and against..
2006-09-05 05:10:47 · answer #5 · answered by yeah well 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If there is 100% proof that it was said person and the crime had truely a horrific effect on the victims life then yes! An eye for an eye! Why should people be allowed to kill someone else and get rent free accomodation for the rest of their lives (well a few years nowadays before they are let out)? I say rent free, it is us tax payers who pay the rent! I cant even afford my own rent!! I believe in the 3 strikes and you are out rule! If you are told at the begining commit certain crimes and you die, then that should put everyone off and if it doesn't then we are better of without them anyway! Maybe i am a bit harsh!
2006-09-05 04:54:11 · answer #6 · answered by johnapdavies 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
When you come up with a legal system that is perfect in every possible way. I'd get busy if I were you.
Just because the people we hold are, for want of a better word, scum, do we want the state to commit premeditated murder on our behalf? In what way does that make us the superior? If you wish to descend to the level of a murderer...
By the way, DNA evidence is NOT 100% proof positive. Ever heard of chimeras? While incredibly rare, they do exist.
2006-09-05 05:24:10 · answer #7 · answered by Morgy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO
sorry for being controversial but look at the no. of criminal charges that have been overturned in the last 20 years, how long did the Birmingham six sit in jail for a crime they did not commit?
You can never be totally sure that the right person has been arrested, look at Barry George, convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the murder of Jill Dando, but now doubts are being risen as to weather he is guilty or not! He would have been hung if we still used the noose. Its easy to get carried away and emotional when a young child is killed or molested, hell if they touched my son I'd kill them myself but as an institution we can never bring capital punishment back.
2006-09-05 10:16:59 · answer #8 · answered by flibertyjib 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So do you advocate the taking of a life? No hope for redemption or reformation, no consideration of maladjusted morality due to mental abnormalities or the (very) poorly educated, no time for those suffering severe emotional breakdowns due to traumas in their lives? There's any number of reasons why not but what it really boils down to, is blatant hypocrisy on the part of the state, a double standard that not only can and is proved not to act as any sort of deterrent but actually allows people who do (or would) commit severe/violent criminal acts to feel justified in doing so. Criminality and prison populations by proportion of populations of nation states are much higher where the death sentence is applied by the state - across the world and throughout history, without exception.
2006-09-05 05:05:49 · answer #9 · answered by blank 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
100% proof has never existed & will never exist! Even with DNA evidence, people have to collect the DNA, analyse it, store it etc. Mistake can be made and have been.
Then there are always reasons why people might want to tamper with it or people who think it doesn't show what what's claimed.
The death penalty is just for primative countries who don't know any better.
2006-09-05 10:45:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely not!
There is no place for judicial murder in a civilised society.
As for DNA evidence, there is nothing certain when samples are mis-handled or mislaid.
There have been quite a lot of cases in UK where the forensic evidence has turned out to be incorrect. Some of these would have been capital cases.
What use is a posthumous pardon?
2006-09-05 06:06:04 · answer #11 · answered by lightfoolstheway 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋